Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Qt-Powered Lumina Desktop 1.6 Released For BSD/Linux Systems

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Nille_kungen
    replied
    Originally posted by kpedersen View Post

    Just so you realise that doesn't improve KDE's score in any way... It just means that they are now *both* very crap.
    Upgrading plasma from 5.11 might improve results, you only removed that part in you quote.
    Right now it's Plasma 5.18 LTS that is the latest release and since it's an LTS version it will probably be used in many distributions.
    If you use a distribution with systemd then you can use gamemode that might improve performance.
    https://github.com/FeralInteractive/gamemode
    Last edited by Nille_kungen; 02-13-2020, 01:27 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • kpedersen
    replied
    Originally posted by 240Hz View Post
    Furthermore xfeces switched to the more bloated and slower gtk3
    Just so you realise that doesn't improve KDE's score in any way... It just means that they are now *both* very crap.

    Leave a comment:


  • 240Hz
    replied
    Originally posted by fulalas View Post
    So I found the benchmark!

    Boot time:
    KDE: 23.8 seconds
    Xfce: 12.6 seconds

    Time to open first instance of the file manager:
    KDE: 1.4 seconds
    Xfce: 0.2 seconds

    Heavy NTFS folder loading:
    KDE: 7.9 seconds
    Xfce: 4.6 seconds

    Big amount of files/folders copying:
    KDE: 92.0 seconds
    Xfce: 73.0 seconds

    Deleting the files/folder from above:
    KDE: 9.9 seconds (finally one case where KDE is better!)
    Xfce: 14.3 seconds
    KDE 5.11 was many generations ago, a lot of performance improvements happend since then. Furthermore xfeces switched to the more bloated and slower gtk3

    Leave a comment:


  • fulalas
    replied
    So I found the benchmark!

    Boot time:
    KDE: 23.8 seconds
    Xfce: 12.6 seconds

    Time to open first instance of the file manager:
    KDE: 1.4 seconds
    Xfce: 0.2 seconds

    Heavy NTFS folder loading:
    KDE: 7.9 seconds
    Xfce: 4.6 seconds

    Big amount of files/folders copying:
    KDE: 92.0 seconds
    Xfce: 73.0 seconds

    Deleting the files/folder from above:
    KDE: 9.9 seconds (finally one case where KDE is better!)
    Xfce: 14.3 seconds

    Leave a comment:


  • kpedersen
    replied
    Originally posted by 240Hz View Post

    You shouldn't be using the Linux kernel either, it's to bloated. Go use plan 9 or something and leave those who wish to get work done and run modern programs alone.
    Of course I don't run a Linux distro (pretty much for this very reason). I also stay away from all bloated programs like the plague. It is surprisingly easy.

    Why do you suggest avoiding modern programs though? Are you saying they are all bloated or just the crap sloppy ones?
    Last edited by kpedersen; 02-04-2020, 05:08 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • fulalas
    replied
    I'm impressed by the fact that the post-truth era has definitely arrived. People say what they want and ignore the facts, creating their own truths. This is nuts!

    If you don't believe me, I find it wonderful; you shouldn't. But at least test yourself and bring the numbers (and your methodology) and also read about it. Phoronix did a FPS benchmark in 2018 and here's the conclusion: 'Regardless of windowed or full-screen, KDE Plasma 5.11 came in slower than the other desktops tested out-of-the-box.'

    If you want to try yourself (boot time, memory consumption, etc.), Porteus is a nice way of doing it because it's portable (not need to install, boots from a USB stick just fine) and it has DE-specific ISOs: http://dl.porteus.org/x86_64/Porteus-v5.0/
    Last edited by fulalas; 02-04-2020, 04:54 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Nille_kungen
    replied
    Originally posted by kpedersen View Post
    Just check out the sheer number of patches required to it to build / run on different platforms (even different distros). Also you can kind of see by the fact that it is impossible to get KDE 3 compiling on a modern platform. If you project this by 10 years, we can safely make the same assumption that KDE5 will also be impossible to get compiling on a (then) modern platform.
    Unless of course they start engineering in some preservation mechanisms into the code.
    Haven't you heard of Trinity Desktop Environment (TDE)?
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinit...op_Environment
    Right know you can build KDE3 (TDE), KDE4 and plasma5 on your distribution of choice, you're claim isn't true.

    Leave a comment:


  • 240Hz
    replied
    Originally posted by kpedersen View Post

    You are exactly right. Xfce is also a bloated piece of junk. As I said before, FOSS is not doing well when it comes to desktop environments. They are all exceptionally fragile and bloated.
    You are talking crap. Don't blame the desktop environments for your autism, they are fine. You shouldn't be using the Linux kernel either, it's to bloated. Go use plan 9 or something and leave those who wish to get work done and run modern programs alone.

    Leave a comment:


  • 240Hz
    replied
    Originally posted by fulalas View Post
    Gosh, is there a DE news without these fights? What's the point?

    I'm one of the developers of Porteus distro and I'm totally confident to say that KDE is anything but light compared to, let's say, Xfce. It's not a matter of opinion. Just to give you some numbers.

    Module size:
    KDE: 92 MB
    Xfce: 18 MB

    Memory consumption after boot:
    KDE: 410 MB
    Xfce: 253 MB

    I lost the last benchmark I did regarding boot time, file manager performance and some other things, but I remember Xfce was better in everything, and by a considerable margin.

    And regarding compiling and dependencies, KDE is waaaaay more complicated to build. It depends on heaps of libs and there are endless modules to build and set. It's a nightmare, really.

    But, hey, that's OK if you're a user and prefer KDE or whatever. Performance is not everything
    These numbers are bullshit. All tests show that plasma used to use as much ram as xfeces, and since xfeces switched to gtk3 ,KDE uses even less ram . KDE has much better performance, less stutter, less input lag, less ram but has much better features. Sorry but xfces is pure crap . I understand you have a shitty computer and every megabyte of ram counts , so ditch xfces and try KDE for more performance

    Leave a comment:


  • kpedersen
    replied
    Originally posted by 240Hz View Post

    Xfeces has pretty terrible performance, very high input lag and lack of vsync. Uses more ram than KDE (thanks to gtk3) and looks like shit with no features. Furthermore you cannot install xfces 4.0 on a modern computer therefore it sucks and is unmaintainable by your logic.
    You are exactly right. Xfce is also a bloated piece of junk. As I said before, FOSS is not doing well when it comes to desktop environments. They are all exceptionally fragile and bloated.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X